IMDb user comments for
Never Cry Wolf (1983) More at IMDbPro »

Filter:

Best Chronological Prolific Authors Loved It Hated It Hide Spoilers:

Page 1 of 5:

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5]

Index

44 reviews in total

---

38 out of 39 people found the following review useful:
Never Cry Wolf portrays elements of wilderness most of us are oblivious to, silence and melancholy., 16 December 2001

Author: Ray Stubblefield (rstubblefield@yahoo.com) from Martinsville, VA

I have loved this movie since the first time I saw it over 15 years ago. But as I have read through numerous reviews, I find them missing a few elements that make this movie so wonderful.

There are two subtle elements of wilderness, that unless you have experienced them, you will probably miss in the movie, silence and melancholy.

When one experience solitude and wilderness as Tyler does, the first thing you notice is the silence that surrounds you. The only noises that can be heard are the ones you make, and simple actions like scratching your hand, striking a match, or the rustle of your nylon parka as you simply move all become a symphony of noises you never noticed before.

The director, Carroll Ballard, takes great pains to illustrate this in the beginning of the movie( knowing all the while most viewers will miss these subtleties) as Tyler is left on the a frozen lake with all his gear strewn about. Rosie guns the engine to his plane for the third time and finally gets to takes off. The sound of that single engine plane is deafening and overpowers everything within 25 miles, but the silence Tyler is left with as the last throb of the plane's engine disappears in the distance is even more so. All of Tyler's actions at this point center around the noise they make. Notice this when you watch.

The next element of wilderness and solitude the director so painstakingly portrays is melancholy. There is no better way to describe it. Melancholy is an intangible, an emotion, yet for any who have experienced wilderness on the level that Tyler does knows how overwhelmingly real it is. It is palpable. The melancholy not only comes from within but comes from all around. It is an element of wilderness that is there even if man is not.

The scene that best depicts this melancholy is when Tyler is out sitting on the rock, alone, with only creatures of the tundra to keep him company. It is twilight. His hair and glasses are wet from an earlier snow, and he sits and plays his oboe. Not a song but a phrase, an echoing phrase that sings out his loneliness to the empty expanse. And off in the distance is a kindred reply, the howl of a lone wolf, a cry that says I know, I understand.

Never Cry Wolf is a tremendous film and is equally underrated. In one sense it is a master piece, one that will never receive mass appeal or recognition. It speaks to us on multiple levels and with subtle intensity, but unfortunately most of us aren't able to hear the message.

---

26 out of 27 people found the following review useful:
A haunting masterpiece that will move you, 3 November 2001

Author: thirdi from United States

I remember when this movie came out I had no interest in seeing it. I thought it was a Disney kid's movie and basically forgot about it for years. About a year ago I caught it one night on cable and began to watch it. I immediately knew that I was seeing a great film, it was obvious within 5 minutes. Since I caught it in the middle and had missed the beginning, I decided to not ruin it and I turned it off with the idea of renting it the very next day, which I did.

"Never Cry Wolf" is a beautiful and breathtaking film about a biologist who travels alone to an extremely remote part of The Yukon in order to live with white wolves, and study their behavior. Charles Martin Smith, who I've always felt is an under-rated actor (see "The Untouchables" and "Starman") gives an unforgettable performance. The cinematography is spectacular, the music is superb, and the message is subtle and haunting.

One of those rare films that can easily be rewarding for adults and kids. "Never Cry Wolf" is a true classic in every sense of the word, I would give it a 10 out of 10 and I do not throw the "classic" word around lightly. Do not miss this film.

---

25 out of 28 people found the following review useful:
Fine fictionalized documentary ahead of its time, 28 July 2002
Author: Dennis Littrell (dalittrell@yahoo.com) from SoCal

This fictionalization of the Farley Mowat book about his Arctic adventures studying wolves is amazingly enough perhaps the most controversial film Disney studios ever made. How sad is that? The reasons for the controversy would seem minor: first, the movie is not entirely true to Mowat's book; two, it's lightly plotted; and three, a man is seen running around naked in the tundra. To which I say, so what? so what? and gee, how offensive. (Maybe they should have clothed the wolves.)

The latter complaint is the major reason for all the ranting by some "reviewers." To them a Disney film showing human nakedness seems a sacrilege and they want their bowdlerized world returned to them, and they want Disney censured and made to promise never to do anything like that again! The complaint that there wasn't enough tension in the film is also off base since this is a contemplative, even spiritual film, not a slick thriller. People with sound-bite attention spans who need to mainline exploding cars and ripped flesh to keep them interested need not apply.

The criticism that Director Carroll Ballard's film is not entirely true to the book is legitimate, but I would point out that movies are seldom if ever entirely true to their source material. A film is one kind of media with its particular demands while a book is another. It is impossible to completely translate a book into a movie. Something is always inevitably lost, but something is often gained. Here the cinematography and the beautiful musical score by Mark Isham are fine compensations.

The acting by Charles Martin Smith as "Tyler" (Farley Mowat) and Brian Dennehy as Rosie, the exploitive redneck bushpilot, and Samason Jorah as Mike the compromised Inuit (who sells wolf skins for dentures) and especially Zachary Ittimangnaq as Ootek, the quiet, wise man of the north are also pluses. Note how compactly the main issues of the film are exemplified in these four characters. Indeed, what this film is about is the dying of a way of life, not just that of the wolves, but of the Inuit people themselves who are losing their land and their resources while their young people are being seduced away from what is real and true and time-honored for the glittering trinkets of the postmodern world. This is a story of impending loss and it is as melancholy as the cold autumn wind that blows across the tundra.

What I think elevates this above most nature films is first the intense sense of what it would be like for a lower forty-eight kind of guy to survive in a most inhospitable wilderness, and second the witty presentation of some of the scenes. Ballard works hard to make sure we understand that it is cold, very cold and desolate and that there are dangers of exposure and weather and just plain loss of perspective that have killed many a would-be adventurer and might very well kill Tyler. I think it was entirely right that near the end of the film we get the sense that Tyler is going off the deep end emotionally, that the majestic and profoundly melancholy experience has been too much for him.

Tyler begins as a greenhorn biologist dropped alone onto a frozen lake amid snow covered mountains rising in the distance so that we can see immediately how puny he is within this incredibly harsh vastness. The following scene when Ootek finds him and leaves him and he chases Ootek until he drops, and then Ootek saves him, gives him shelter, and leaves again without a word, was just beautiful. And the scenes with the "mice" and running naked among the caribou and teaching Ootek to juggle were delightful. The territorial marking scene was apt and witty and tastefully done. (At least, I don't think the wolves were offended.)

This movie was not perfect, however. For one thing, those were not "mice" that Tyler found his tent infested with. I suspect they were lemmings posing for the cameras. Those who have seen the film about the making of this movie undoubtedly know what they were; please advise me if you do. Also the "interior" of Tyler's tent was way too big to fit into the tent as displayed. Also it would be important from a nutritional point of view for Tyler to eat the "mice" raw as the wolves did! (The actual creatures that Mowat ate I assume were mice.) If Tyler had to exist purely on roasted and boiled rodent for many months, he would encounter some nutritional deficiencies. Still, eating a diet of the whole, uncooked mouse would be sustaining whereas a diet of lean meat only would not. (Add blubber and internal organs for an all-meat diet to work.) Incidentally, the Inuit people get their vitamin C from blubber and the contents of the stomachs of the animals they kill.

Where were the mosquitos and the biting flies that the tundra is infamous for?

Since this movie appeared almost twenty years ago, the public image of the wolf has greatly improved and wolves have been reintroduced to Yellowstone Park. I think everybody in this fine production can take some credit for that.

---

27 out of 33 people found the following review useful:
A Cure for Rabid Delusions, 12 January 2003
Author: mollusks from Yarblesville

Dogs are man's best friend for a reason. Socially, they are not much different from us, and both species know it. It's the subject of some scientific conjecture whether man would have survived his early predators had it not been for dogs, who warned of danger and probably even helped to defend us. Early dogs would have been much closer in temperament to wolves -- hardly pets. Only god knows to what degree we have influenced each other's evolution over the ages.

This film figures our relationship to the canine family must be pretty intimate, saying, in essence, that if you can't see yourself in a wolf, you probably can't see yourself at all. Wolves have families, challenge each other for social dominance, and goof around a lot. (I would have preferred that the photography and juxtaposition speak for themselves, but it's a quibbling point.) This is where a mere nature documentary would wrap.

This film is the work of an artist. (Well, two, actually: Farley Mowat and Carroll Ballard.) The lone wolf, the observer, is the analogue for the scientist/artist who is telling us this story. The government wants him to conform to (and thereby justify) its lies, but fortunately the carbon forms are blown away by the wind early. He's going to have to see with his own eyes now, and like all the best films, the message is the same: you are what you see. Of particular interest in this film is the dialectic between society and individuality, which has never been so visually compelling.

The complexity of the characters and the situation causes some people to commend the film for being what it is. That's just patting it on the head. Never Cry Wolf is the best antidote I know of for all the rabid delusions of religion, myth, and science that infect our pack. Put it at the top of your list.

---

11 out of 11 people found the following review useful:
Quiet Majesty, 2 March 2004

Author: vvanpo (vvanpo@comcast.net) from Renton, WA USA

"Never Cry Wolf" is a good reason why I like the movies. Human characters, compelling story, warm humor and breathtaking scenery (with the Atlin area in Northwestern British Columbia filling in for Alaska) combine to make it a favorite of mine.

"Tour de Force" doesn't seem quite the right turn of phrase for Charles Martin Smith's performance as the scientist Tyler for such a low-key character but he is the heart of the movie. It's especially noticeable when I associate Mr. Smith as Toad in "American Graffiti". His scene with the wolves and caribou is amazing and primal.

Samson Jorah is marvelous as the Inuit Mike ("He says, 'Great idea!'")

What a treat it is to watch compared to all the noise and quick-cut editing that dominate modern movies.

---

12 out of 13 people found the following review useful:
Raw and Intense, 20 May 2006

Author: sam89-1 from United States

This film is not a typical Disney movie; so much so that you wonder why they did it. The simple good-evil storyline common to most Disney movies does not exist here. All characters have a different motive, and all are convinced of their own morality. What's more, they convince you. You see the issue of enviornmentalism in Alaska from all sides; and even if you may not agree with everyone, you can at least see it from their perspective. In the end however, the message is far more simple and it is tough to argue with.

Another trait that immediately stands out about this movie is its striking rawness. For a good part of the film, the main character narrates, and one gets the feeling he's writing home, as opposed to telling an audience. This adds both an intimacy and a sincerity and is very effective.

Though it is largely unknown (and therefore largely under-appreciated), Never Cry Wolf is a beautiful, complex and forceful. A high point for Disney -- no contest.

---

10 out of 11 people found the following review useful:
This is an extremely enjoyable movie., 25 April 2000

Author: Rosemea D.S. MacPherson from US

This is a good autobiographical movie which raises interesting issues about the preservation of wildlife and the necessary role of the wolf in the ecosystem of the north. Charles Martin Smith (American Graffiti) "Farley Mowat/Tyler," reminded me of my husband when he was in graduate school and had to do field research. Typical of graduate students, they are so excited about the project that they don't analyze the difficulties and the ways of doing their stuff. I highly recommend the movie even though the movie makers modified the book. The wolves are not killed nor did the bush pilot bring in Japanese investors to build a resort in the book. What a relief! I like movies done in different locations about preservationists, they always show neat scenes, challenges and perseverance. I am surprised that Tyler did not die in all that ice. I guess there would not be a movie, would there? In such circumstances I am sure I would freeze to death. The movie is fun, interesting, educational, the cinematography is great, and also touches on the Indians' religious beliefs, that it is always interesting. I love that movie. Favorite Scenes: Candle light dinner, with barbecued mice. All the mice starring at Tyler while he eats his dinner. The menu: mice with crackers, barbecued mice, mouse sandwiches . . . The territorial demarcation with the wolves; the wolf finishing in two minutes what Tyler needed many cups of tea to do. Funny!!!! Favorite Quotes: "We are suspicious of what we don't understand." I recommend it! This is an extremely enjoyable movie. I have seen the movie many times.

---

9 out of 12 people found the following review useful:
A voyeuristic pleasure with a valuable message, 3 June 2003

Author: saska-3 from Redmond, WA

This movie premiered at an age in my life when I was fascinated with wolves and their impact on nature - at 10 years old, I met a researcher while on a trip with my parents who actually lived with wolves for 9 months out of the year. On his recommendation I read Farley Mowat's "Never Cry Wolf" and finagled my theater-phobic parents into taking me to see the film shortly thereafter.

Its impact on me, partially because of my love for the subject matter, has been lifelong.

Although the film does not always capture the humor of Mowat's narrative, it does a brilliant job of portraying, with patience that may grate on the nerves of blockbuster-seasoned moviegoers, the experience of its protagonist. Complaints that the film does not focus enough on the wolves are understandable, but the book and the movie are about one man's journey to understanding the wolf's place in a natural ecosystem. He must learn to be like them, understand their behavior (which mirrors humans' in so many ways), and ultimately choose a loyalty to one or the other species.

It is advisable that the viewer adopt expectations similar to those for a National Geographic documentary, although the story is only loosely based in fact. Sometimes things happen slowly in the arctic. Sometimes they don't happen at all, or the things that happen are not what you'd want out of the "plot". Cinematography and the environment are stunning. Charles Martin Smith's Tyler is a regular guy, without spectacular heroics (but brave enough to tackle activities "Fear Factor" contestants won't touch for a pile of money).

Because it was filmed entirely on location and without pretense of special effects, its visuals stand up very well in comparison to the films of today. Its pace is the sticking point that will make it unpalatable to some viewers, but I give it a rarely-awarded 9 rating for its beauty, social conscience and thorough enjoyability, taking away 1 point only for its somewhat heavy-handed finale that is less palatable than Mowat's original message.

---

6 out of 7 people found the following review useful:
From my top ten desert island list, 25 June 1999

Author: Lucky-63 from Seattle

You know you're in trouble when the only thing you can pick up on the shortwave is Russian folk music.

Disney at its best. Top-notch cinematography, wonderful sarcastic humor, over-the-top Dennehey acting, beautiful wilderness, man-spoils-what-he-touches, and another ambient score to die for from Mark Isham.

Fricassee of mouse. A surplus of toilet paper and light bulbs. Special magic from the scenes with Ootek right up to the very end. Running naked with the caribou. Outdoor adventure ne plus ultra for the gentle man. But hold onto your shotgun, the entrepreneurs are coming. They'll take you apart, "just for the evil fun of it".

---

5 out of 6 people found the following review useful:
An enjoyable adventure, 23 October 2005

Author: OriginalMovieBuff21 from United States

I saw this film in my Biology class since we were learning about organisms and how they interact with their environment. I'd have to say that this was a good movie and pretty enjoyable. Charles Martin Smith had a good performance and the script made him have good dialogue, along with him narrating almost most of the film too. I liked how the main character inhabited in all the places he encountered to and how he became friends with the Inuit. I thought those scenes were included nicely in the film. Overall, a good adventure that was interesting throughout the movie. I recommend it.

Hedeen's Outlook: 8/10 *** B

---

---

Page 1 of 5:

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5]

Add another review

---

Related Links

Plot summary	Plot synopsis	Amazon.com summary
Ratings	Awards	External reviews
Plot keywords	Main details	Your user reviews
Your vote history